PDA

View Full Version : World of Anicca



Candacis
06-17-2011, 05:33 PM
I'm making myself familiar with Fractal Terrain to seek a landshape that I like for my new world-building project. But now I can't decide which world looks better. I narrowed it down to seven worlds. Maybe you can help me and just post which one do you like the most and why. That would be a great help :)

And I'm wondering how the climate would be in those worlds. I hope with the basics of this I can take the next step and actually make a map.

Candacis
06-17-2011, 05:36 PM
And the other world attachments:

ravells
06-17-2011, 07:07 PM
Fractal Terrains can give you 'stringy' shaped continents which don't really look convincing (except if you want stringy shaped continents). 4 looks the best to me because the continents arn't so thin but it all depends on what you are after. The author of Fractal Terrains 'Waldronate' who is a regular poster on this site, has posted some great tutorials for FT, you might want to do a search and check them out.

arsheesh
06-17-2011, 07:32 PM
Yeah that was my thought as well. I also kinda like 3 as well, but 4 is probably the best.

Cheers,
-Arsheesh

Candacis
06-17-2011, 07:44 PM
Thanks for the help ^^ Yeah, Fractal produces a lot of snake like worlds. I don't know if some other parameters would make better looking worlds. I used 0.79 roughness, 68% sea and 2.34 landsize.
On the other hand is actually a good thing it doesn't look like earth since its a fantasy world.

waldronate
06-17-2011, 08:49 PM
http://www.ridgenet.net/~jslayton/CGTutorial/index.html is always a good place to start.

Greason Wolfe
06-17-2011, 10:56 PM
In general, I'd agree with ravs and arsheesh that worlds 3 or 4 probably look best for unedited output, and maybe world 7 as well. But in all honesty, any one of them could work well with a little editing. I'd strongly recommend following the link that waldronate posted, it'll really open up a whole new world (no pun intended) for you in FTPro.

GW

Steel General
06-18-2011, 08:55 AM
Map #4 is definitely foremost for me (yes, bad pun intended :P)

Master TMO
06-19-2011, 03:03 PM
4 for me as well. I believe a way to reduce the stringiness of the continents is to reduce the Lacunarity of the fractal function. The tradeoff is that you'll have to include more octaves if you want to zoom in further, which slows down processing a bit. It's something I'm currently experimenting on for my maps.

Candacis
06-19-2011, 04:06 PM
Thanks for all the advice, I think number 4 looks the most realistic, too, but I read the tutorial and I will try some other parameters.
MasterTMO, how can I reduce the lacunarity in the program? Is that a function?

waldronate
06-19-2011, 05:08 PM
On the World Settings property sheet, select the Fractal Function page and click the Parms button. The underlying parameters for the fractal function are shown on the dialog that appears, including Lacunarity. The fractal functions in FT are broadly of the "frequency synthesis" or "scale and add" school of thought. For every defined octave, the program computes a noise value, scales it by 1/(Lacunarity raised to the H value), and adds it to the result. What that means is that lowering the lacunarity will increase the amount of work that the program has to do to get an equivalently rough surface (you'd need to increase the number of octaves).

I usually don't mess with the lacunarity (setting lacunarity to 1.0, for example, will do a whole lot of work with no visible effect). When I do want a slightly different appearance, I try not to get much below 1.9 or 1.8; raising it above two is also an option. I would recommend aiming for an irrational or transcendental number instead of an integer.

Another degree of freedom can be obtained by varying the H parameter for the fractal function, but it's really twitchy.

Beoner
06-20-2011, 12:27 PM
For me the #4 is the best. I don't know why is that, i just like it more than the others. I think the land shape is pretty good for a map.

Good Luck with the map,